Post navigation

Analysis of July 5 Slaviansk Developments

Analysis of July 5 Slaviansk Developments

Part 1 in our series

A Note to Readers: This is the 1st installment of a series of related reports on the real underlying methods and framework which characterize the Ukrainian civil war. These are thorough in exploring and explaining, in as full a way as possible, the most relevant factors which operate upon this phenomenon. This report is approximately 2200 words. In addition to these reports, there are another dozen or so shorter articles on the subject to be found on our site, as well as about two dozen interviews and podcasts, which can be found either in the multimedia section or embedded in the shorter articles where indicated. Being familiar with our other reports makes this report more flexible.

The sky is not falling

Basic Military Principle: “Do not confuse strategic removal for the loss of a position.” Attention must be given to the 4th generation warfare where real-time information, shared by our own friends and supporters can be used to demoralize our camp.

Briefly we will attempt to bring some needed clarification to the unclear ‘fog of war’ and ‘propaganda of defeat’ oppositional and even 6th column type reporting on last night’s and today’s developments in Slavyansk. We will also be releasing some analysis made in podcast and other media from last week or two that we have not published due to operational difficulties on our end which are related to the general organizing effort of international volunteers being sent to the region.

These will go up very soon, which will also confirm and help to place today’s developments in proper context. Reports from Novorossiyan leadership and commanders should be compared to both conflicting Russian and NATO media/information and should be analyzed in light of known doctrines and past precedents. RT and VoR are running same version of these events as Western media because this follows a pattern where both sides have found desirable outcome of reporting pro-Russian losses. We have already discussed this in prior releases, and this conforms to that pattern.

Poroshenko

On the Western, Atlanticist, NATO side it is evidence of ‘winning’, something Poroshenko and NATO needs. And this ‘victory’ should be understood in this way:

Since April 4th, this is the only major maneuver by the tattered Kiev Junta (KJ), whose fighters are primarily not Ukraine army but rather foreign mercenaries combined with Right Sector militia (trained) and untrained supporter-fanatics that have been indoctrinated by Radio Svoboda and Radio Free Europe under Operation Gladio ever since the post WWII period, but increasingly so since the early 90’s collapse of the USSR.

Together they have been put into battalions and platoons called ‘Azov’, ‘Kiev-1’, and also placed into the uniforms of the ‘Natzguardia’ to help improve the appearance of normalcy and credibility. In three months of low to medium intensity fighting, where popular Novorossiya militias (NM) have had to defend known positions, the KJ has gathered all its available might and resources in order to ‘displace’ (more on that in the below) parts of the NM from one small city with a population of about 130,000. It is necessary to reflect on the significance of that fact alone, and what it says about the inability of the KJ to project power.

On the Pro-Russian side, reports of atrocities do several things. They bring attention to the brutality of the KJ and helps to get more people to be more involved and ready to push for deepening of the intervention on the Russian side.

Accurate reporting from Novorossiyan commanders and leaders on the ground which explain and contextualize the same objective data must take precedence over defeatist propaganda from both hostile forces and their 5th and 6th column supporters.

The 6th column, within alternate English language journalism and analysis, whether consciously aware or not are at times even friends like Vladimir Suchan — who rails against Putin’s inactivity thus providing a good propaganda cover for actual Russian involvement, but can border on demoralizing defeatism — and Andrei ”the Saker” — who generally has decent (though at times misinformed) and supportive analysis but yet responds emotionally, journalistically, and cataclysmically to real-time news that may be construed unfavorably.

This ‘chicken little/sky is falling’ type of ‘analysis’ is neither incisive nor descriptive and falls for the common error of having one’s sense of the developments being led around by the nose by the controlled news cycle, which reports reality in a strange ‘immediate cause and effect’ sort of way. The news cycle also places the importance of ‘immediate’ news over the bigger picture, because this garners clicks, ad revenue, and general interest. The negative result is a view of the situation that loses all sense of proportion and the real operating dynamics. It is important (for the West) for Russia to be criticized for not doing enough, especially if this becomes the dominant criticism in western Europe.

The underlying belief that one takes from this line is that Russia is not formally involved. This noble lie allows Russia’s allies in Europe to place more pressure on media, public and on the pro-NATO side of Europe (inner politics) and increase the fissure between the EU Atlanticists and the growing EU crypto-Eurasianists. But when criticism of Russia is directed at pro-Russian population in Ukraine, it can have a demoralizing effect. But of course what is more demoralizing is the shelling of civilian populations.

It can also confuse those on the fence; but at the same time the popular opinion of the majority of people are only significant in their relationship to shifting the mainstream view within a select audience of certain nations. For example: popular opinion in the US and England are much less relevant than that of Germany, Poland, etc. Actual NM commanders and leaders like Gubarev and Strelkov are clear that the movements of militia out of Slavyansk are of tactical significance and not significant of ‘defeat’.

Paul Gubarev

Paul Gubarev said today: ” Igor Strelkov decided to leave Slavyansk. This was done at night. Loss militia was minimal. Organized and united militias went towards Kramatorsk further redeployment continue obviously to Gorlovka and Donetsk. We have won in this instance, while harboring relocated personnel and artillery calculations (harboring “war” basically shelling on peaceful cities). In this time we can use it to effectively complete the process of joining forces militia, their centralization under a more unified command, improve relations and communications troops, to increase the supply of troops, especially heavy weapons (artillery and armored vehicles).”

Igor Strelkov

Igor Strelkov is clear about the developments earlier today in Slaviansk. His statements have a high degree of credibility as they corroborate other statements from those on the ground, and our own contacts in the area. Strelkov continues: “Kutuzov also departed, and this was the plan. A Russian general departure just before the decisive victorious battle ”

The flag of ‘Ukraine’ does not fly over Slavyansk, despite a publicity oriented order by Poroshenko. Reports that the NM was ‘surrounded and defeated’ contradict the large and orderly movement of militia vehicles and personnel into Kramatorsk. This caravan was not assaulted, and movement to Kramatorsk was announced prior to the increase of shelling the prior day. The obvious implications of this should be understood in their full and complete meaning.

NM moved out for a number of tactical reasons and among them was because they refuse to use women, children, and elderly as human shields. Also the NM could not attack the sources of the shelling from their position, which are from longer range heavy artillery from the Ukrainian side south of Kharkov.

Shorter range artillery barrage and KJ troop deployment were along highway M03 north of Slaviansk and between the bodies of water and the smaller road north or the town of Myrne. This defensible position made it difficult for NM forces to push the KJ troops just north of Slaviansk, who were also being covered by longer range artillery deployed south of Kharkov, actually in and around Izium and Kamyanka: the highway M03 corridor generally.

This combination of artillery cover for KJ and the geographic specificities will also prove it difficult for KJ forces to push any farther south than Slaviansk. The NM movement last night is also intended to eliminate KJ and NATO justification for shelling the population. Civilians directly involved in aid to Novorossiya militia have also been given safe exit and temporary relocation. Stay behind small platoons of Novorossiya militia are still in Slaviansk, capable of Guerrilla style ‘hit and run’ attacks which will make ‘permanent occupation’ by Kiev junta of Slaviansk improbable or very costly. Also this effort by the KJ is by itself not sustainable.

If they attempt to remain in Slaviansk, they have committed to a position which is open to attack from within, as mentioned above, and also from the surrounding areas south, west, and east. Everyone benefits from this false announcement ‘retreat’ on the face of it. But overall this development favors the innocent ethnic Russian civilians and the Novorossiyan side.

Tactically it is unwise for the Kiev Junta to declare this a victory; this disables them to continue the shelling of Slaviansk, and now whatever groupments they have in the area are subject to be hit from more mobile Novorossiya groupments whose positions are no longer known, no longer obvious. The Kiev junta knows that it cannot defeat a popular, well armed and Russian aided ‘insurgency’.

Their aim is to ethnically cleanse the Russian populations (majority population) in a way similar to the NATO war on Yugoslavia and the Serbians. Kiev-NATO declaration of ‘victory’ in the battle for Slaviansk disables them from being able to do so in the face of media reporting and the overall pro-Russian slant that regional and much European reporting on this issue has taken. This is due to a series of Russian victories on the European side, the growing fissure between Pro-Eurasian elements within the EU, like in Germany, and the Pro-Atlanticist (NATO) side who has significant (but waning) control over Brussels policy and the EU generally.

The pro-Kiev reporting by CNN and BBC which primarily influences Americans and the Anglophonic sphere are irrelevant, because the fissures in European discourse lay with the Germans, Poles, Italians, Austrians, Hungarians, and so on. Thus the triumphalist reporting on the Kiev side will not significantly influence the important ears. Again, the Kiev junta groupments are now also subject to be hit from behind, or from all sides, as the Novorossiya militia has moved its heavy pieces, APC’s etc. out of Slaviansk. Again, Novorossiya militia moved this in an orderly fashion, which means they were not encircled or retreating in any kind of haphazard way.

Conclusively by ‘switching roles’, the entrenched KJ groupments are now the obvious targets instead of NM groupments. Strelkov is playing this well – continuing to insist that ‘without Russian assistance’, the situation only worsens. Improvement or worsening of the situation is not even secondary or tertiary to his statements, as Russian support has been prevalent: these statements are propaganda war effort meant to reinforce the view that Russia is not involved.

It is true, of course, that the Russian ‘government’ is not directly involved in the supplying of armaments, troops, etc. to Novorossiya. This is being done by NGO’s and private philanthropic work of the ‘nationalized oligarchy’ – those elements of the Russian ruling class with ties to grass roots organizations, non profits, religious and charity groups, cultural organizations connected to Cossacks and Nationalist groups, Monarchist and irredentist groups etc. etc. and so on.

It is also being done in a parallel way by similar orgs connected to the Communist Party of the Russian federation and its connections to the CP of Ukraine This is the same way that the US and Israel work through Saudi Arabia and Qatar in middle east conflict.

As we have explained since the Turkish Spring uprising one year ago, the Russians have mastered these 4th generation warfare type techniques generally called ‘color revolution’ or ‘arab spring’, and incorporated these tactics into their position and strategy. We predict that events will continue to unfold and further reinforce the narrative to these events as we have explained them since November of 2013.

Joaquin, brilliant analysis. Now you have given me a real clear understanding of Russia’s strategy. Thank you very much for this. All Putin and Lavrov have to do is keep their cool and don’t veer off the program. Let nature take its course. The fascists, who will take over Slaviansk formally, will behave just like fascists always do, i.e. violence against the population which will naturally increase the hostility and resistance of the people there. The Atlanticists never in their wildest imagination would have thought that their coup in Kiev would have resulted in an armed rebellion in Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk. They were caught flat footed. Now, because of your great input, I can see that Russia has laid a trap for the Atlanticists not only in Ukraine but in the whole of Europe. The countries to really watch are Poland, Hungary, Austria and Germany and to a very lesser extent France (as a side note the French are very pissed off about the US punishing the large French company because of their business ties to Russia). Right now Hungary and Austria are definitely not anti Russian and take a very independent stand. Poland is seeing increasing irritation at the US (the foreign minister’s comments are proof of that). But Germany is the grand prize. After visiting Germany and in particular Berlin for five days recently I am very optimistic about Germany coming down on the right side. I had two independent Germans tell me in two different cities that they really dislike the Stasi and what they’re doing to their privacy. When I questioned them about the Stasi they told me that’s the word they use for the NSA. Amazing. To the Berliners the US is the new dictator. By the way Berlin’s really a cool place with a lot of very intelligent young people who are taking to the streets against the FED of all things. I can now see in Germany a growing movement against the Atlanticists in Ukraine and US pressure as long as Putin keeps his cool and not make any rash moves which the US will try to provoke.

Thank you for confirming my prescience and intuitive confidence. Mercenaries and the 5th and 6th columns are no match for the Russian patriotism, resilience, strategy and leadership. I have 100% trust in President Putin. The future of this world is in good hands.

Good article, though it raises a number of questions. Let us say that Novorossiya can hold the current territory it has, perhaps half of Donetsk and Lughansk oblasts. The Kiev regime will militarize and build a large army, all designed to provoke Russia and to eventually be sacrificed in a fight against Russia. It is a big gamble to think that a bad economy and rotten regime will lead to a collapse; leftists often argued that the Nazis would lead to the working class rising to overthrow the system. It never happened, as the Nazis just jailed everyone. Just as the Kiev regime has put pro-Russian activists in jail in Kharkov or Odessa, and kidnaps people in places like Mariupol. So, does it look like Novorossiya can create a big enough army/militia to start liberating Kharkov or damaging regime assets in other regions? Perhaps Russia intends to ensure no gas in the Winter? A lack of gas could cause Kiev to collapse, though that might be blamed on Russia.

Another question is if Russia can withstand politically another million or so refugees. At what point will the heat on Putin be too much to bear? Many argue that he essentially promised to back those with a Russian identity in the Ukraine against civilian massacres. Obviously, that hasn’t happened. At what point will his popularity collapse? Not everyone has the nerves of steel or tolerance for pain that one learns in the KGB.

Finally, there is the question of the key countries, and how they are going to respond. Just because the public may feel that the US provoked this crisis, it won’t necessarily lead to their governments being reasonable. Actually, this raises the question of the putsch and EU behavior in the first place. Is the Russian strategy of breaking the American influence over most of Europe feasible? If it is, then Russia will truly change the world. If not, then the last ten years of work has been misplaced to a large degree.

By the way, you might want to comment on what you think the Kremlin would like to achieve. It seems to most of us that the goal was a federalized Ukraine, but Russia getting the Crimea. This seemed impossible to many of us, as taking the Crimea essentially meant a war against just about any government that could ever be put in Kiev, even something like the Party of Regions. However, that ship has sailed, as a lot of blood has been shed. Do you think the Russian goal now is a Novorossiya and a breakup of the rest of the country? Would a UN/EU occupation be a good thing?

I do not believe that the goal for Russia was a break up of Ukraine or the creation of a Novorossiya. This is being foisted upon Russia and sort of a trap has been laid.

Russia could easily now engage in a similar process as Crimea was handled to have even more than just the two oblasts in question.

The underlying reality is that the laws of economic development and natural accretion are bringing Russia close together with western Europe. Since this is true, and also true by itself. is that Ukraine generally as a tendency to be pulled towards Russia.

Also that Russia needed was normalcy and mundane trade relationships and active diplomacy.

Every Timoshenko was going to be bound to sign an agreement which Russia found favorable, and kept Ukraine in its most natural relationship with Russia – similar to Belarus. Just as she did, her rhetoric aside.

Every Timoshenko and every ‘orange revolution’, color revolution, was going to be for nothing in terms of Atlanticist efforts, due to the laws of natural accretion.

Every Timoshenko was inevitably going to lead to a Yanukovich, who maintained the Timoshenko agreements with Russia.

The Yanukovich type, the coalition that brought him to office is the most typical and predictable, ‘normal’ type of leadership that would be elected to a single Ukraine under relatively stable conditions characterized by pluralistic and civil (read western political style) norms.

Ukraine was bound to be brought closer to Germany as well, with or without Brussels policy – but this must be understood in light of the broader and overarching binding of Germany to Russia.

The general trajectory since the late 19th century is the emergence of a Paris, Berlin, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, Tokyo axis based upon mutual development, rail, resource transit with mutually beneficial tariffs along the way. Most disruptions of this development ever since have been the result of mayhem based speculators of the Anglo-American financier type.

Your explanations illustrate why the putsch and subsequent actions occurred. A logical course, but the US is in the business of creating failed states, so … it still leaves the question of what Russia might want in the current situation. It would seem to me that the only way to go back to some kind of normal situation would be to kick the US out of Eastern Europe. As in, the countries there want the US to leave and choose Russia instead.

Perhaps you can comment on any similarities with the Balkan question. Do you think that the US and Germany want to make a large part of the Ukraine into a new Croatia? And did Croatia come closer to Germany after the wars there? In other words, could the old Yugoslavia be a working model for the Anglo-Americans? Do you think that was a success for them?

I have failed to successfully post several times. I hope that the outcome this time is different.

I am in total agreement with your analysis. Western and US public opinion is irrelevant except in the sense that it will show their own populations more clearly that the those governments could care less about their peoples’ popular opinion. Despite the western medias best efforts, anti war sentiment is very high, especially regarding the events in Ukraine. NATO.s posture is unsustainable because of great geographical distance, astronomical costs of paying an expensive foreign mercenary army, and the futility of conducting a counter insurgency that runs contrary to local popular sentiment. Parralles with Vietnam, Iraq, and Venezuela come to mind.

The well established western practice of misrepresenting ‘realities on the ground’ is quite evident in this case. They present the shelling of residential areas and the destruction of civilian infastructure as military successes, when really they have no military significance. I think another comparison is in order. During the western backed Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 2006 the only effect that the air campaign had was inflicting civilian casualties and destroying infastructure, the military impact was minimal. Nevertheless, western media presnted the events as a great Israeli success. Because the powers involved swallowed their own propaganda, they confidently followed up with a disastrous land campaign that in one fell swoop showed their “invincible tank” to be an obsolete death trap and showed that their use of warships was no longer without substantial cost.

I don’t think that the instant case is, in essence much different. The Kiev Junta plagued by a lack of popular support, astronomical cost of maintaining a corrupt foreign composed mercenary force that is in no way ideologically committed to the cause they fight for, is in no way likely to achieve success. In the long run, it is unsustainable and is simply a huge waste of resources and will likely harm their long term interests. Poroshenko is in a very precarious situation despite his western backing.

Another significant factor is economic reality. The best paying jobs in Ukraine are in Kharkov as it is the most industrialized area and has the best industrial infastructure. Galicia is an economic basket case. I doubt that Kiev enjoys much favorable public sentiment.

This, having been said, I don’t understand how anyone could be disheartened by unfavorable western media coverage, it’s all a dog and pony show.

Thank you for your hospitality. I felt a bit disappointed that upon rereading it, I don’t think the reply was as thorough as the first but now I know to Control C it before attempting to post it. We live and learn

Yes, you are right, 100% right here in fact. And that is a great and very useful parallel you have accurately drawn with regard to the 2006 war.

There is in deed a big problem of US backers – americans and others who are heavily invested in US finance and to a lesser extent industry – who believe US coverage.

I think that some of what RT and VoR does is also create distorted views because those would be the obvious ‘go to’ sources for american backing investors to get ‘the other side’ of the story.

The nature and structure of these investment banking and investment firms who engage in or are connected to the volume trading on wall street have salaries and bonuses connected to changes which in the long run may be untenable.

The problems are too numerous to elaborate, but at essence is the fact that all of these american institutions are composed of individuals who quite simply have lives to lead outside of their obligations, and the brilliant discoveries of a few obsessed insiders who work in and around those institutions may not be taken as more credible or insightful when compared to a charlatan with the same position in those firms whose job is to do state department marketing and create credible (though false) sounding solutions.

I go back and forth on in my own mind whether Russia overtly should massively intervene or not. I do understand Russia’s hope of peeling off the US from Europe and/or a rebellion in the non southeast of Ukraine. There are inklings of independence in Germany, Austria, Poland and Hungary but will it be enough to counter the Atlantacist actions in the Ukraine. This is the $65,000 question. In the end Russia will have to evaluate if the pro Euroasia forces have enough gumption and ability to hold back the Ukrainian fascists and their US backers or is it a lost cause. If Russia decides that regardless of the Herculean effort their diplomats are making to get especially Germany on their side and it’s just not going to happen then Russia will have to take action that’s in their national interest and basically screw the west. In other words it should be absolutely obvious to any independent minded person in Europe even right now that the Kiev regime and their western supporters are peforming terrible massacres on the eastern Ukrainian population. What more is it going to take to convince Germany. The US is giving Russia two choices which are bad, either invade to stop the KJ aggression against the population and do nothing overtly or invade and drive the fascists out of the area. When will the tipping point come, who knows. Will Russia eventually send in peacekeeping troops to the area and make it known that they are not going to annex the area like they did in the Crimea. Russia simply has to send in peacekeeping troops to save Russian lives and stop the war. What’s the west going to do anyhow. Start a nuclear war. Let them sanction. Western Europe needs their gas and trade as much as Russia does. Germany has very extensive trade with Russia not because of any goodwill on Germany’s part but because of capitalist profits and for their own self interests. If Russia kicked the fascists out of the east Ukraine, the Atlantacists will huff and puff and threaten but in the end they won’t do much.

I just really hope Putin knows what he is doing and that he has pieces in place that will turn this thing around.

Shoigu is not merely a political appointment – he is extremely competent, one of the, if not the most competent top generals Russia has. His observations and applied tactics within the broader strategy have been used several times already, and each time the Atlantacists are surprised. Putin’s reliance on Shoigu to oversee and direct the situation in Novorossiya is not mistaken.

The problem is that some German elites either don’t believe, understand or care that Europe will collapse – without a shot being fired – if the Euro-Atlanticists follow the lead of the US Atlanticists.

Please tell me what you think of this analysis. It says that Germany is behind all this as it was in Balkans. And more importantly today, that Putin has been fooled and mesmerized.And form our perspective here, this analysis resonates powerfully.

One does imagine that it would be even more profitable to simply take all the resources in Russia than buy them. The other problem is the Nazi forces in Germany and their friends who joined them from places like Galicia were quite integrated into the NATO system. For a long, long time. Putin seems to be a Germanophile, so at least he can speak to the elite in Germany in a productive way. Whether this will change Germany’s behavior is an open question.

Paul, have you considered getting Dmitri Orlov on your program. It would be great to have both him and Joaquin on at the same time. Dimitri has lived in both the former USSR and the US and has written a lot comparing the invevitable collapse of the US and how it will fare against the collapse of the Soviet Union. All three of you could have a real stimulating discussion on the Ukraine situation. His website is http://cluborlov.blogspot.co.uk

If I can be critical….
Her conclusion may be right for other reasons (that Russia strategy of splitting Germany from Atlanticists will not work), but I wouldn’t agree with much of her premises. It is based on a faulty analysis of power and how it works. Psychologically, any power which is in fact beholden also acts in the spirit of independence. People with power, even if they are vassals, believe themselves often to have the power to act independently.

However ‘Germany’ is not a person, but refers to many things, and there is not space here – but in essence there are various interests and industries, corporations etc.

Looking at organizations, governments etc. from the outside it is often a matter of shorthand or practicality to speak as if they are individual people, with one mind. In reality they are meandering networks of bureaucracies and layers shrouded in inefficiencies and beleaguered continually by the clash of smaller ego groups numbering 3 to 10 people.

That is is the foundation in positive organizational theory (not normative, but actually observing real organizations and their functions) which allows one to speak of splits etc. In this case it is already more than well documented the Eurasianists among the Germans.

She is right that Germans know their history. But their history didn’t start in WWII. Instead we should look at the close of the 19th century and the relationship and divergence of views between Bismark and Wilhelm II.

Main problem with her analysis is that this is not the 90’s and this is not Yugoslavia.
There is not enough taking into consideration the European position, especially among German banks, in the wake of the repackaged toxic waste they received in 2008 from the US in the financial sector.

Also there is no mention of OU (Our Ukraine – Poroshenko as purely a US stooge) policy, and also no mention of Operation Gladio or Radio Free Europe or Svoboda Radio all sponsored by the US, of course also supported by Germany. But of COURSE we are talking about Occupied Germany.

But yes, that raises the issues of the real terms of the so-called Nazi surrender, and how the actual German command was taken into the US oriented control of Germany.

All of these reveal networks of power, juntas within states, and it becomes less and less meaningful to speak of ‘THE’ Germans. Rather, we can speak of ‘WHICH’ Germans.

No mention of the remnants of East Germany and their integration into subordinate (but still powerful) positions within unified Germany of the 90’s, and continuation of cooperation with the Russians.

No mention of the NSA wiretapping and no mention of more and more and more related.

Also let’s look at Yugoslavia today — Serbia stubbornly remains outside of the EU and looking at the status of their negotiations, it is at a standstill and zero of the dozen and a half various areas of agreement – 5 of which they will be miles apart on – have even started to be worked on. Meanwhile South-stream continues on, and Serbian plans to allow a Russian base in the south-east of the country carry on forward in steps.

Due to European problems symptomatic in the PIIGS states problems and the toxic bonds problem of 2008, even former Yugoslavia is drifting outside of the EU sphere of influence. Montenegro is only 3 or 4 assassinations from being in good position to rejoin Serbia, and EU is scrambling to change the constitution of B&H due to the reality that otherwise within a decade (optimistically) a non EU Serbia would also be in position to re-assume Republika Srpska by popular referendum in RS.

US and EU collaboration on destruction of Yugoslavia worked for 10 years – and now what? Drifting back towards its regional and historical friends (not without incident) – Romania, Bulgaria and growing consensus among planners, intellectuals, and social movement organizers for a larger Balkans Federation which is closer to both Europe and Russia insofar as the latter two are closer to each other, and absent that then closer to Russia.

Yes, there are some among German ruling circles who believed they could assume control over Ukraine. But a better analysis of the origins of the EU and WHICH Germans are behind that (more than one stripe).

Those Germans going along with the radical change of norms and the coup in Ukraine however were not, and cannot justifiably be said to be acting alone.

The US and its German allies/vassals …. (can we really distinguish? there are US to US vassals who are allied … this distinction is a matter of perspective and the individual and ego groups involved would certainly not agree about who is controlling who. Everyone thinks they have an angle and people self-delude into thinking they are controlling events which in fact are controlling them. That is human nature). … created for OTHERS on the fence a credible sounding plan for a coup in Ukraine.

The US side created a credible sounding plan for their German allies.

The actual US plan has nothing to do with helping Germany have more power. More power for Germany is more independence from the US, and more integration into the broader continental integration.

US is employing strategy outlined by many people including EH Carr and similar, and are playing the role of England vs. German and French relations, but this time as between EU and Eurasian relations.

Henn leaves out too many known facts, and does not account for them for her views to be taken further.

Much more, but its onerous to dissect something this riddled with problems.

You need to write an article or give an interview/do a show with Morris on the Balkans. What seemed to be behind the wars, and where things seem to be going now. Also, have the attitudes changed since the wars?

*** Anonymous said…
Re Henn on Germany … Has a few good points on German corruption, how Germany turned the EU / euro into a rip-off debt-slave machine for its own benefit. And quite credible that Germany has been doing criminal shite in the East for some time, in the Balkans and Ukraine.

But the big perspective on Germany ‘going Russian’ is not a claim that existing German establishment is tilting Russian … but rather that a large German faction tilts that way, and they are not far from seizing power.

What Henn didn’t discuss was previous German Chancellor Gerhard Shroeder, who adopted a Russian orphan, works for Gazprom, has denounced US ‘sanctions’. German industrialists as well, they are quite pro-Russian. After Deutsche Bank blows up and collapses from their 50-trillion derivatives bankruptcy, the industrialists will take control.

For her part, Merkel blows with the wind. Once a loyal Communist apparatchik, when the Berlin Wall fell she turned on a dime. If the wind shifts again, she will shift with it. At the moment – with Putin looking like he has morally collapsed, and US-Nato looking ‘in control’, she is of course going with the stronger-looking horse. But she speaks fluent Russian and, in a near future where German and EU banks have collapsed, the US is bankrupt, if Putin looks strong again … Merkel would, in a heartbeat, lead Germany to Russian partnership.

Henn’s ideas remind of an odd UK writer / lawyer, Michael Shrimpton, with wild-sounding claims that many evil events today are actually dictated by a secret German intelligence service continuing Nazi crimes, and who have infiltrated US UK etc. … Some say he’s a funny Israeli shill, blaming Germans like in an old movie. ***

Joaquin, great comments. I’ve never heard such clarity on this subject from anyone other than you. Your comments on east Germany’s influence on the rest of Germany is very interesting. I always felt from the very beginning of the reunification of Germany that it’s a two way street. Sure west Germany will be very dominating but east Germany will also have a large influence on west Germany. To think otherwise is really foolish and against nature. When humans interact they inevitably influence each other and ideas get bounced off each other, experiences shared when people intermingle. I recently visited Dresden and Berlin (of course parts of it being formerly east Berlin) and was amazed to see icons of the DDR still there. In Dresden you would think that the dominating west would have erased the evidence of the barbaric fire bombing of the city by American and British war planes at the end of WWII. But the monuments are still there and it is clear what the “allies” did to the city. The same with the former east Berlin. There was no erasing of communist streets, parks, monuments etc. Karl Marx strasse is still there, Alexander Platz is still there with its very vivacious and mixture of people hanging around, the magnificent and towering antenna put up by the DDR was not bulldozed down and is now considered a proud icon of Berlin (maybe even rivalling the Eifel Tower in splendor) and the Soviet War Memorial in the Tiergarten is still there and well taken care of. At the Topography of Terror which is a museum to explain comprehensively how the Nazis gained power, the treatment of the Soviet prisoners of war are given good representation. From what I saw German reunification has been very successful and I believe that it has been a two way street. So this is why I say that Russia’s prestige and sympathy is much higher in Germany than it was before reunification. This should bode well for the coming battle between the Euroasianists and the Atlantacists. If it is true that Nazis still control Germany then Berlin and Dresden would be much different cities than I have characterized above. So my experiences there are proof that the realistic forces are in ascendancy but it just takes time to totally win out. Be patient.

Thank you for that, sincerely. Apologies as its been some time before I could return to this. I think your observations of Germany and how culture and discourse work are spot on. Ostolgie is also no small thing in Germany, and the image that some Germans, especially media, project to the world is very ‘West Germany’ which is contrary to the ‘feel’ of Germany which includes the old DDR. The view that Russia is a friend and that west Germany rehabilitated nazis has some foundation in truth.

Germany didn’t go through a ‘lustration’ after 89, and that sense the deal made with Gorbachev regarding Germany wasn’t entirely ignored. Many of the DDR’s officials made their way into the echelons of unified German power structures. What comes to mind is the film ‘The International’.

Joaquin, thanks for your reply. My observations prove that it is necessary for people to visit other countries in order to get a “feel” about the people. I learned a helluva lot about Germany in those 17 days. You see quite a contrast between the cities I visited which included Cologne, Wiesbaden, Weimar, Dresden and Berlin. Regarding social protections like unemployment insurance, public medicine, etc. there really wasn’t that much difference between West Germany and the former DDR. I visited an emergency hospital in Dresden (former DDR) and the doctor there who spoke good English told me that nothing really changed there when reunification took place. People still pay pretty much what they did before. I think the left was very worried when reunification took place mostly because of the arrogant and self-congratulatory propaganda influence of the west in claiming victory over communism. But I never saw it that way. By what I saw in especially Berlin, where the two worlds came together, was a very dynamic and exciting population with a vivacious and open mentality. I believe the two parts have really benefitted from each other’s strengths. The western mentality brought more consumer goods, free enterprise spirit, and more freedom in general while the east brought to the table more humility, less materialism and frankly maybe more of a people’s solidarity. Don’t believe for a second that West Germany conquered East Germany and forced the east to submit. It’s really a reunification in the best sense with a sort of melting into each other.

Another lesson that I learned was to ignore whatever the western mainstream media tells about everything. We have to not let the media ideologues influence us and cause defeatism.

My advise: Turn off mainstream TV news and websites and follow only great and truthful websites like this one.

old Russian saying: Russians take a long time to saddle their horses, but once they saddle them, they ride very fast. What this means is that Russians are using their well tried tactic of patience. This is a brilliant article, which explains everything. By removing 90% of ther personnel and weaponery out of Slavyansk, the Russians have made Donetsk invincible and Kiev will have no choice but to sit down and negotiate, ie. most probably agree to a federalized Ukraine. Time is not on Kievs side. It cannot function without Russian gas and trade, and Putin knows it. For Kiev it would have been wiser to have immediately aggreed to a federilized Ukraine, and none of this would have been needed. That way they could have prevented a financial crash of the country, which is now innevitable. Putin is playing the waiting game, and he will win it.

Thank you. I see that the Russian self defence forces in Eastern Ukraine have concentrated their strength around Lugansk and Donetsk. They are under attack, but I also see that the self defence forces are well armed (today on the Internet I see that they have moved tanks and APC’s against Kievs advancing military). Do you have any new info with respect to these new developments ? Do you think that Kiev has any chance of taking Lugansk and Donetsk ? Greetings.

What if Putin, being a strategic thinker that he is in addition to being a master in judo, has an intention to make not just eastern Ukraine but the whole Ukraine a failed-state-showcase of what happens when the US, Nato, EU, and the IMF causes havoc in eastern Europe. Maybe he is giving a lesson to Germany, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc. and especially his fellow Russians what happens when the US supports the rabid fascists in their region. He realizes that the neo-cons and the Atlanticists, being the mindless psychopathic and sociopathic killers that they are, are incapable of grasping the lessons and consequences of their actions and will press ahead uninterruptedly and fail to see the trap that is being laid in front of them. Remember that psychopaths always think that they’ll never get caught, that they’re invincible and they, until the very last moment, will always deny their doom (just ask Napoleon and Hitler). So what if Putin’s strategic advisors egged on the Kiev regime to bomb unimportant civilian locations making them think that there was concentrated partisan militia and now scattering the militia in various areas where they can take down invididual KJ troops. Could it be Putin’s motive to get the KJ bogged down in eastern Ukraine and at the same time causing increasing revulsion of the people in Russia proper. It’s one thing for the patriotic Russian media to educate on how the US caused mayhem and failed states in Libya and Iraq. It’s quite another to show that the US is causing this same mayhem and failed state right on their border and in the process killing innocent Russians. Indeed by demonstrating the barbarity of the US and its KJ puppets, Putin may in fact be delivering a blow to the fifth columnist pro American forces in Russia. “See what your American friends are doing to our people”. To the sixth columnists that Joaquin mentioned, Putin can call their bluff and tell them “If you’re so upset at what’s happening in Donetsk, don’t get angry at me. Why don’t you start mobilizing and organizing your own people and the public to volunteer to help out the resistance. Either put up or shut up.”

Remember what I say now. The US and Nato have nothing positive and constructive to offer. All they can do is create mayhem, death and failed states. That’s all they know how to do. All they can do is blackmail, sanction and threaten states like Bulgaria into not letting a gas pipeline through their territory. Now I’m absolutely certain that the whole of eastern Europe and Germany will eventually come on the side of Russia. I have no doubt now. The truth is so obvious. If Putin had intervened right away in eastern Ukraine then this process of Europe and Russia learning about the US and Nato would have been pre-empted. Putin wants this process to continue to its conclusion. Unfortunately innocent people will die but sometimes a few have to be sacrificed so the world can learn the truth. I’m sorry but that’s how the world and politics work.

Gary,
If people cannot see the NATO methodology in Syria, Iraq, Serbia, Somalia, and Libya, then it is questionable whether a new destroyed country will change things. Except for the naive folks in the victim country. Last night, I met someone from Bulgaria who is reasonably informed about the world in many ways, but he sees Putin as being very dangerous. He thinks Putin has changed in the last five years and looks deranged at times. Now I think Brzezinski and Clinton look deranged half the time, but what can one say?

Perhaps another way to phrase this is people don’t want to see the worst. Strelkov just mentioned how the people in Donetsk are totally unprepared psychologically for war. Why not? A big one has been going on not far away. And the people in Russia are probably even more unprepared, yet they are the target of this mess. Probably very few in Moscow want any involvement at all with the Ukrainian mess. They don’t want to pay higher taxes, they don’t want refugees in the parks or subways, and, one could say they are the perfect example of the old saying about “You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.”

So, on to your bigger point, yes, a lot of blood and destruction and pain was necessary. I don’t think Putin can tell people to go join the militia, though. That is the function of government, and his popularity is going to fall substantially due to his perceived inaction. However, the rebels are starting to pay those in the militia, and Strelkov is just the man to turn that rather confused operation into an actual army. One that might start to go on the offense before you know it. In any case, Putin’s popularity will be fine if the broader situation around Novorossiya turns out fairly well. I suspect he did the right thing by waiting, as Russia needs Kiev, not just Donetsk. So the people in Kiev need to suffer. After all, the Germans repented in 1946, not 1940. Unfortunately, Kiev is not as rational as Berlin was.

One problem I see with your analysis is that Russian propaganda has been lousy, while the Anglo side usually had good stuff. The Kremlin seems to like to handle things in the back rooms, with oligarchical factions and deals. This may be the way the world works, but you can’t let the enemy define everything. If Russia had funded groups to promote the Transcarpathian region for the last decade, they could now run ads saying “Stop the radicals from destroying the amazing cultural mix in Transcarpathia” and have locals there talk about the wild folks with too many Swastikas who are in government. In other words, non-Russians who don’t live next to Russia would be saying these things. And the members of that NGO/group would be sincere, and not Putin lovers. Even the NY Times would have a hard time badmouthing them.

So, will folks in France or Poland actually come around to somewhat supporting Russia in this struggle, and would this force their governments to change their behavior? I’m afraid that the Atlanticists would start a big war or economic collapse if they saw that occurring.

Finally, I suspect Joaquin will feel that your argument in the last paragraph is what Putin and others in high Russian circles have been doing. A lot of important players in Europe and Asia support Russia, but don’t want to suffer whatever the US will do to them if they say that in public. So everyone says they want more NATO, but they refuse to pay for anything.

Hi Paul, I just listened to your interview again with Joaquin. Russia, at this time, is not interested in interfering in the internal affairs of the US or establishing NGO’s because this is their prime directive (kind of like the Federation of Star Trek fame not interfering in other planets). I don’t think this is necessary. Russia has other means which are much more structural and profound in defeating the US and Nato agression. I would like to call your attention to a very profound blowback that has ocurred on account of the coup in Kiev. It’s the huge elephant in the room that the mainstream media doesn’t want to talk about. And that is the reserve currency of the world, the dollar. China and Russia have correctly identified the demise of the dollar as the reserve currency of the world as the achilles heel of US strength. Although there has been a trend in the move away from the dollar with Russia, China and the BRICS leading the way for awhile, the coup in Ukraine has triggered an acceleration of this. This is no coincidence. Now it’s just not limiting itself to the BRICS but the French financial elite may be coming on board followed by South Korea, Japan, etc. Every currency swap agreement that countries make directly with Russia and China is another chip away at the dollar hegemony edifice. Take away the dollar as reserve currency then no longer do countries need to stockpile them, thereby decreasing demand for dollars and thus a huge drop in value. The US will have to behave like any ordinary country with increasing inflation caused by excessive money printing which the rest of the world will eventually not soak up. Take away the dollar hegemony and you take away military, political and financial hegemony. It’s as simple as that. So this will have happened if there was no Ukraine coup but the events there intensified this. So this is your blowback moment.

Of course Ukraine is a problem for Russia but it could be an even bigger headache for the US in the near future. When you compare Russia and the US in the 1990’s with now it’s obvious that Russia vis-a-vis the US is much stronger. For the life of me I don’t know why the US didn’t deliver the fatal blow to Russia in the 90’s when they had Russia on its knees. I guess the imperialists aren’t infallible after all.

You have a much better take on the specifics of the Ukraine war and all the intrigue and personalities but I like to concentrate on the big picture on the world scene. I stick to my argument that the US and Nato will get weaker and weaker with Russia, China, Brics, Iran, etc. getting stronger and stronger. Ukraine, in the big picture, will be a bump in the road.

NATO Hopes for Russian Invasion of Ukraine
This article by Tony Cartalucci confirms the article on this website:

Tony Cartalucci
NEO
July 15, 2014

In the minds of many following along with the Western narrative regarding the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, the Russians have already “invaded.” Despite paradoxical claims of nuclear-armed Russia “invading” eastern Ukraine but with Kiev’s battered, disorganized troops in mismatching uniforms and without daily rations overwhelming these forces, many have chosen to believe that indeed Kiev’s inability to assert control in Ukraine’s easternmost provinces is solely because of Russian “intervention.”

The “Re-Invasion” of Ukraine?

Even with the West claiming Russia has already “invaded” Ukraine, at each juncture of the ongoing conflict, an “impending Russian invasion of Ukraine” is held up to once again terrify and incense Western audiences – as if “another invasion” is about to take place – a “re-invasion” perhaps.

The Business Insider in a July 6, 2014 article titled, “Russia Has Effectively Invaded Eastern Ukraine — The Question Is How The West Will Respond,” claimed (emphasis added):

For his part, Mr Putin appears, at least for now, to have ruled out a full-frontal invasion. On June 24th he theatrically instructed the ever-loyal upper house of parliament to cancel the authorisation for military force in Ukraine that he had ordered up in early March. The move was largely an empty fob to Mr Poroshenko and another way to ward off more Western sanctions. Yet even if a tanks-and-soldiers invasion seems unlikely, a Russian invasion of another sort began long ago: one that resembles the slippery, post-modern war …

With Kiev’s military campaign against fellow Ukrainians to the east faring poorly, an actual Russian invasion of Ukraine would only benefit them and their backers in both the European Union and collaborating states within NATO. Despite attempts to portray local defense fighters withdrawing from the Donetsk city of Slavyansk as a “retreat” and a “turning point” in the conflict in favor of Kiev, Kiev’s forces have continued to suffer heavy losses, most recently in Lugansk where apparently an entire tank column of between 40-70 vehicles was destroyed.

The BBC reported in its article, “Ukraine conflict: Fighting flares near city of Luhansk,” that:

Fighting has flared outside the rebel-held east Ukrainian city of Luhansk, with rebels saying government forces tried to storm the city with tanks.

Rebel military leader Igor Strelkov was quoted as saying his forces had beaten off columns of government armour attacking from the south and west.

The same article would also report:

A Ukrainian presidential source told Ukrayinska Pravda newspaper that an armoured unit was trying to relieve troops who had been blockaded for weeks at Luhansk airport.

Strelkov (the nom-de-guerre of Igor Girkin) said the rebels had beaten off two government armoured columns numbering between 40 and 70 tanks.

With Kiev forces encircled in Lugansk and the forces sent to relieve them apparently destroyed – a miniature Stalingrad – it would seem like Russia has little reason to “invade” Ukraine. Still the West is intent on salvaging what appears to be an increasingly ineffective Ukrainian army racking up as many civilian casualties as it is defeats on the field of battle.

Russia on Sunday accused Ukraine of lobbing a shell over the border and killing a Russian civilian and warned of “irreversible consequences,” in a sharp escalation of rhetoric that raised fears of a Russian invasion in Ukraine’s east.The Washington Post, in the wake of Kiev’s most recent setback in Lugansk, would declare in its article, “Russia warns Ukraine of ‘irreversible consequences’ after cross-border shelling,” that:

The accusation, which Ukrainian officials denied, set off furious denunciations in Russia, with one senior legislator calling for pinpoint airstrikes on Ukrainian soil of the sort he said Israel was making in the Gaza Strip.

The use of hyperbole allegedly spoken by a single Russian legislator to stoke fears of an impending Russian invasion has been a frequently used ploy by the Western media to manipulate public perception. Quoting obscure former “officials” in Iran has been used to disingenuously portray the whole of Iranian foreign policy in a particularly unflattering light more than once. The Washington Post would also claim of the Ukrainian conflict:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said last week that his nation was prepared to take all necessary steps to defend its territory — a declaration that appeared to keep open the option of outright intervention in Ukraine.

The desire by the West to portray Russia as “invading Ukraine” is rooted in the belief that it will undermine Russia’s political leverage and open the doors to more aggressive NATO support for the faltering regime in Kiev. Perceived Russian aggression might make it easier to convince NATO and EU members who have not followed suit in exacting sanctions and condemnation against Russia to begin taking a more anti-Russian stance.

Why Russia Doesn’t Need to Invade Ukraine

Whether or not Russia is already covertly supporting fighters inside of Ukraine has little impact on its unnecessary need to directly invade Ukrainian territory. If Russia is not supporting fighters inside of Ukraine, it appears then that these fighters are more than capable of miring Kiev’s forces and picking them apart through classical guerrilla warfare on their own. If Russia is already covertly supporting fighters inside of Ukraine, all it needs to do is send more covert aid. The West is already accusing Russia of allowing armored vehicles to move over Russia’s border with Ukraine – what else could Russia do then that would constitute an outright “invasion?”

At any point of the conflict, if Ukraine’s provocations are not obvious enough, Russia will not benefit from crossing the border into Ukraine. Russia’s restraint thus far has exposed the West’s “responsibility to protect” (R2P) doctrine as dressed-up imperialism. Surely if ever a conflict warranted “humanitarian intervention,” it would be Kiev’s assault on eastern Ukrainians with warplanes, tanks, and artillery – indiscriminately shelling populated centers to compensate for the lack of capable grounds troops necessary to more precisely and safely engage with anti-Kiev fighters. That the West is not only failing to condemn this, but encouraging it, lays R2P to rest as cover for unilateral, global military aggression.

For Russia to likewise cite R2P would be to legitimize this otherwise dubious policy, and even normalize its use elsewhere around the world.

For many reasons Russia will not benefit from invading Ukraine, and for many more reason, NATO and the EU would benefit from it – at least rhetorically. The Russians are therefore likely to resist provocations by Ukraine to cross the border and give NATO further excuses to meddle in Eastern Europe. Instead, Russia will allow Kiev to continue displaying its brutality and incompetence on the battlefield while eastern Ukrainians continue picking apart their forces. Meanwhile, economic pressure will continue undermining the regime in Kiev even amongst its supporters in western Ukraine.

The clock is ticking and an outright military victory over Kiev’s forces is not necessary for eastern Ukrainians to achieve their goals. Conducting a confounding guerrilla campaign against Kiev will time out the clock until either mutiny or economic pressure gets the better of the regime and attempts to push eastward to consolidate its power will become an impossibility.

Russia is not getting sidetracked by these provocations. They are actually increasing their prestige by showing how restrained Russia really is in the face of these very obvious and transparent provocations. You can see right through the Kiev Regime and their western backers. Time definitely is against the Kiev Junta. Nothing more to add. Great article.

Donetsk People’s Republic militia gains control over village on border with Russia DONETSK, July 17 /ITAR-TASS/. Self-defense fighters in the southeast Ukrainian Donetsk and Luhansk regions have forced the Ukrainian military to retreat, the local news agency Novorossiya reported on its website on Thursday.

The Ukrainian troops have left their positions in the settlements of Sabovka, Govorukha, Roskoshnoye and Georgiyevka outside Luhansk and retreated to the west, the news agency said.

The militia has also established control over the settlement of Marinovka in the Donetsk Region. During the battle, the Ukrainian troops were surrounded by self-defense forces and had to retreat.

Troops of the Donetsk People’s Republic opened fire from 120 mm mortars against the Ukrainian military’s fortified positions in the area of the settlement of Mospino in the Donetsk Region, destroying a KAMAZ truck, an armored personnel carrier and an anti-tank system and killing and wounding about 50 personnel, self-defense militia reported.

July 16, 15:44 World Martial law introduced in Ukraine’s Donetsk Kiev has not yet commented on this information.

Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council spokesman Andriy Lysenko said on Wednesday evening that fierce fighting was underway between self-defense militia and the Ukrainian military in the settlements of Amvrosiyevka, Marinovka and Izvarino in the Donetsk Region.

“We understand that there are losses. The battle is continuing, our guys are fighting on but it is very hard there so far,” Lysenko said.

The southeast Ukraine militia has tanks, combat aircraft, multiple launch rocket systems and artillery guns in its arsenal. The self-defense fighters say they have seized all these armaments in battles against the Ukrainian military.

The Donetsk defenders earlier said they had recommissioned a World War II tank that had long stood as a monument at a war memorial.

Infographics
Who fights in Ukraine
The political crisis in Ukraine led to the formation of many armed groups on its territory. Infographics by ITAR-TASSThe parliament of the newly created Union of the Donetsk and Luhansk Republics on Tuesday declared as illegal all armed Ukrainian formations staying on their territories and said that “corresponding measures would be taken” against them.

Donetsk People’s Republic Defense Minister Igor Strelkov earlier said that the self-defense militia was switching to a contractual basis and would now “receive about $500-800 in money allowance.” Union Parliament Chairman Oleg Tsaryov said the self-defense forces had enough strength to contain the Ukrainian military.

Pro-Kiev troops and local militias in the southeastern Ukrainian Donetsk and Luhansk regions are involved in fierce clashes as the Ukrainian armed forces are conducting a military operation to regain control over the breakaway regions, which on May 11 proclaimed their independence at local referendums.

During the military operation, conducted since mid-April, Kiev has used armored vehicles, heavy artillery and attack aviation. According to Ukraine’s Health Ministry, 478 civilians have been killed and 1,392 wounded in it. Many buildings have been destroyed and tens of thousands of people have had to flee Ukraine’s embattled south-east.

The Ukrainian army has lost 258 soldiers and another 922 have been wounded in Kiev’s punitive operation in Ukraine’s embattled Southeast, Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council spokesperson Andrei Lysenko said on Tuesday.